The Competition Commission of India finds no anti-competitive effect of exclusive distribution agreement that conferred monopoly in the aftermarket for medical equipment warranty services (Dr. Anoop Bhagat v. Spectra Medical System India and Solta Medicals)

Background The Competition Commission of India in a recent matter found that allegations regarding Exclusive Distribution Agreement and Abuse of Dominant Position were not true and thus rejected the matter out rightly finding not even a prima facie case. However, the merit of the complaint did warrant a more detailed scrutiny into the matter. The case [1] was filed by Dr. Anoop Bhagat (Informant) against M/s. Spectra Medical System Pvt. Ltd. (Opposite Party No. 1) and M/s. Solta Medicals, Inc., USA (Opposite Party No.2) under Sec 19(1)(a) of the Indian Competition Act, 2002(the Act). The Informant is a Doctor practicing cosmetology. OP No.1 was the sole distributor selling Fraxel machines (used in cosmetology) in India. OP No. 2 is a global leader in the medical aesthetics markets

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.

 

PDF Version

Author

  • University of Tilburg - Center for Law and Economics (TILEC)

Quotation

Vikas Kathuria, The Competition Commission of India finds no anti-competitive effect of exclusive distribution agreement that conferred monopoly in the aftermarket for medical equipment warranty services (Dr. Anoop Bhagat v. Spectra Medical System India and Solta Medicals), 15 February 2013, e-Competitions Bulletin Exclusive distribution, Art. N° 51461

Visites 230

All issues

  • Latest News issue 
  • All News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • All Special issues